IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
December 10, 2010
LEON HAWKINS, PLAINTIFF,
DERRAL G. ADAMS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lawrence J. O'Neill United States District Judge
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 7, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration. Therein, Plaintiff requests the Court reconsider its order filed September 24, 2010, denying Plaintiff's request for default judgment. Plaintiff reiterates his belief that Defendants have failed to timely respond to his complaint and summons, as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12. (Doc. 28 at 1-4.)
Plaintiff is mistaken. As the Court explained in its order denying Plaintiff's request for default judgment, the Court has yet to find that Plaintiff's allegations state a cognizable claim. (See Doc. 27, Order Dismissing the Amended Complaint with Leave to Amend.) Thus, the Court has not authorized service of the pleadings on any Defendants. See 28 U.S.C. 28 § 1915A(a). Defendants are required to file a responsive pleading only after the Court authorizes service and service is effectuated on Defendants. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12. Until then, Defendants are under no obligation to appear in this matter. Accordingly, because Plaintiff's argument lacks merit, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration (Doc. 28) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.